California v. GoodeAnnotate this Case
A jury found defendant Mark Goode guilty of: burglary (count 1) for opening a metal storm door on a residence; and attempted burglary (count 2) for jiggling a window on the same residence a few seconds later. The trial court sentenced defendant to 16 months in prison for the burglary at the front door and to a consecutive eight months for the attempted burglary at the window, finding that defendant had “[t]wo separate intents to enter and burgle [the victim’s] home.” On appeal, defendant argued his conviction for burglary should be reversed because, in his view, “[t]he evidence was insufficient to establish [he] actually opened the metal door,” and, in any event, “there was zero evidence . . . that he actually put some part of his body on the interior side of that door.” He further argued that he could not be separately punished for the burglary at the front door and the attempted burglary at the window because the evidence showed only a single, indivisible intent: to enter the victim’s residence to commit a theft. After review, the Court of Appeal disagreed with defendant that the evidence was insufficient to prove he committed a completed burglary at the front door, but agreed that he could not be separately punished for burglarizing the victim’s home at the front door and then, only a few seconds later, attempting to burglarize the home through a nearby window. Accordingly, the Court modified the judgment to stay an eight-month term on defendant’s conviction of attempted burglary at the window (count 2) pursuant to Penal Code1 section 654 and will affirmed the judgment as modified.